加州工作场所技术责任法案概述和评论

Airlie Hilliard, Emre Kazim, T. Kemp, Kelvin Bageire
{"title":"加州工作场所技术责任法案概述和评论","authors":"Airlie Hilliard, Emre Kazim, T. Kemp, Kelvin Bageire","doi":"10.1080/13600869.2022.2115749","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Technological innovation and the resulting automation are increasingly being applied in the workplace, which is a high-risk context where decisions can majorly impact a worker’s life. Consequently, a number of ethical concerns with automated employment decision systems have been raised, with California proposing the Workplace Technology Accountability Act to limit the use of electronic monitoring systems and automated decision systems to specific times of day, activities and locations that must be proven as essential job functions. Workers would also be given the right to know, review and correct data held about them by their employer. In this article, we summarise and discuss the key points of the legislation before providing a commentary, where we identify four key themes: (i) how boundaries can contribute to a healthy work-life balance and protect the privacy of workers; (ii) how the requirement for impact assessments reflects the wider movement towards algorithmic assurance; (iii) the necessary and potentially problematic requirement to share notices and impact assessment reports with the Labor Agency; and (iv) how the Act might conflict with existing laws. Our intended readership is those interested in the regulation of automated employment decision tools, algorithmic assurance, and the potential impact of the proposed legislation.","PeriodicalId":53660,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Law, Computers and Technology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Overview and commentary of the California Workplace Technology Accountability Act\",\"authors\":\"Airlie Hilliard, Emre Kazim, T. Kemp, Kelvin Bageire\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13600869.2022.2115749\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Technological innovation and the resulting automation are increasingly being applied in the workplace, which is a high-risk context where decisions can majorly impact a worker’s life. Consequently, a number of ethical concerns with automated employment decision systems have been raised, with California proposing the Workplace Technology Accountability Act to limit the use of electronic monitoring systems and automated decision systems to specific times of day, activities and locations that must be proven as essential job functions. Workers would also be given the right to know, review and correct data held about them by their employer. In this article, we summarise and discuss the key points of the legislation before providing a commentary, where we identify four key themes: (i) how boundaries can contribute to a healthy work-life balance and protect the privacy of workers; (ii) how the requirement for impact assessments reflects the wider movement towards algorithmic assurance; (iii) the necessary and potentially problematic requirement to share notices and impact assessment reports with the Labor Agency; and (iv) how the Act might conflict with existing laws. Our intended readership is those interested in the regulation of automated employment decision tools, algorithmic assurance, and the potential impact of the proposed legislation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53660,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Review of Law, Computers and Technology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Review of Law, Computers and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13600869.2022.2115749\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Review of Law, Computers and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13600869.2022.2115749","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

技术创新和由此产生的自动化越来越多地应用于工作场所,这是一个高风险的环境,其中的决策可能会严重影响工人的生活。因此,人们提出了许多关于自动化就业决策系统的道德问题,加州提出了《工作场所技术责任法案》,将电子监控系统和自动化决策系统的使用限制在必须证明是基本工作功能的特定时间、活动和地点。工人还将有权了解、审查和更正雇主持有的有关他们的数据。在本文中,我们在提供评论之前总结和讨论了立法的要点,其中我们确定了四个关键主题:(i)边界如何有助于健康的工作与生活平衡并保护工人的隐私;(ii)影响评估的要求如何反映采用算法保证的趋势;(iii)与劳工局共享通知和影响评估报告的必要且可能存在问题的要求;以及(iv)该法案如何与现行法律相冲突。我们的目标读者是那些对自动化就业决策工具、算法保证和拟议立法的潜在影响的监管感兴趣的人。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Overview and commentary of the California Workplace Technology Accountability Act
ABSTRACT Technological innovation and the resulting automation are increasingly being applied in the workplace, which is a high-risk context where decisions can majorly impact a worker’s life. Consequently, a number of ethical concerns with automated employment decision systems have been raised, with California proposing the Workplace Technology Accountability Act to limit the use of electronic monitoring systems and automated decision systems to specific times of day, activities and locations that must be proven as essential job functions. Workers would also be given the right to know, review and correct data held about them by their employer. In this article, we summarise and discuss the key points of the legislation before providing a commentary, where we identify four key themes: (i) how boundaries can contribute to a healthy work-life balance and protect the privacy of workers; (ii) how the requirement for impact assessments reflects the wider movement towards algorithmic assurance; (iii) the necessary and potentially problematic requirement to share notices and impact assessment reports with the Labor Agency; and (iv) how the Act might conflict with existing laws. Our intended readership is those interested in the regulation of automated employment decision tools, algorithmic assurance, and the potential impact of the proposed legislation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
期刊最新文献
Certification as guidance for data protection by design Regulatory options for vehicle telematics devices: balancing driver safety, data privacy and data security Electronic justice as a mechanism for ensuring the right of access to justice in a pandemic: the experience of Ukraine and the EU Algorithms patrolling content: where’s the harm? Editorial for special issue. BILETA Conference 2022
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1